Chad L. Kelleher
Saint Anselm College
Department of Psychology
Manchester, New Hampshire
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Saint Anselm College in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts
November 1999

Acknowledgements Where do I begin? I would like to start by thanking my
parents, naturally. They have given me the support I needed throughout
my whole life, but more importantly, they have given me the gifts of education
and of love. Both have helped me grow into a person I didn’t know
could exist. Thank you Mom and Dad.
I would also like to thank the faculty in the psychology department
for their unending dedication to these senior theses, especially Professor
Krauchunas, Professor Flannery, Professor Finn, and Barbara Bartlett.
Thank you Professor Krauchunas for working side by side on the virtual
reality, and for never giving up on that God-forsaken Cypberpuck (copyright
Forte Technologies), as well as all of the phone calls to England, your
passion is commendable.
Thank you Professor Flannery. You have been my advisor all four
years, and you were also the one that helped me develop this topic and
embark on this adventure into virtual reality; your statistical determination
and “never say die” attitude toward SPSS is also commendable.
Thank you Professor Finn, for you have done more than just mark up
my rough drafts and revisions. You have pushed me to grow on more
than just a psychological level. You have pushed me to grow in all
my aspects of life. It is because of you that I have found what I
believe to be my calling in the clinical field of psychology. Someone
somewhere gave you the keys to start opening up the doors to the secret
of life, and you are willing and eager to share those keys with as many
people as you can. Your ability to live life should be commended
and recognized for what it is worth.
I would also like to thank Barbara Bartlett. No Barbara, you
didn’t have any specific hand in my thesis, but you did tolerate my singing,
and my loud behavior, and you let me be who I am as I began to live in
the psychology department. Your ability to accept people for who
they are is what I commend you for.
Three more people to thank, then I am done. I would like to thank
my girlfriend, Elise. She has put up with some of the crankiest annoying
behavior known to man as I have vented about my thesis over the past three
months, and all she has done was smile back and offer words of encouragement.
Thank you, you are my angel.
Finally, to the two females in my life that didn’t let me fall apart,
and more importantly, help me to see who I am and who I truly can be.
Thank you Nic and thank you Erin. If everyone had the support that
I have had from you two since the start of the year, then I strongly believe
many of the problems of today would not seem so unbearable. I’m starting
to get somewhat sentimental, so all I’ll say is that I think the two of
you know what you mean to me. Thank you. We’re done.

AbstractGender differences in visuo-spatial ability have been measured more
than any other form of gender differentiation. One task used to support
gender
differences in visuo-spatial ability involves an orientation and navigational
task in a 3-d maze. This task consists of the participant following a set
route through a maze, then identifying where they believe the start of
maze is in relation to their present position. This experiment was
conducted by Lawton and Morrin (1997) using a
popular video game. However, gender specific experiential skills allowed
males to score more than 20 degrees better in that experiment. It is hypothesized
that by using a virtual reality environment, this average would be lowered.
A gender difference was still present but at a lower degree than previously
seen. There were significant findings involving pointing accuracy
and trial effect, but no significant difference between pointing accuracy
of the 12 males and 12 females who participated in this study.

Table of ContentsAcknowledgements...................................
Abstract...........................................
Introduction.......................................
Method.............................................
Participants..................................
Materials and Procedure.......................
Results............................................
Experiential Skill............................
Full Model Comparison of Turn and Gender......
Comparison of Trials to Criterion by Gender...
Comparison of Pointing Error in
Initial Trials................................
Discussion.........................................
Experiential Skill............................
Gender and Turn in Wayfinding.................
Trials to Criterion by Gender.................
Conclusion....................................
References.........................................
Appendix A.........................................
Appendix B.........................................
Appendix C.........................................
Appendix D.........................................
Appendix E..........................................
Gender Differences in Orientation and Navigation in Virtual Reality
3D MazesGender differences favoring males in visual-spatial performance have
been reported more quantitatively than any other cognitive differences
(Halpern, 1992). Linn & Peterson (1985) showed gender accounts
more substantially for some spatial relations tasks than others.
Gender differences have also been shown to involve speed of response rather
than of accuracy (Blough & Slavin, 1987). However, Lawton &
Morrin (1997) report males perform more accurately on spatial tasks than
females. The visual-spatial task involved in the present experiment,
spatial perception, was deemed by Linn & Peterson (1985) to be one
of the top three visual-spatial abilities represented in literature about
gender differences.
The question of why gender differences exists has not been fully
investigated. While biological and genetic factors cannot be ignored, research
has not offered ample evidence to support such claims that cognitive processes,
and more specifically, visual-spatial abilities are related to genes.
One major factor might originate in the training and experience in both
genders. Baenninger & Newcombe (1989) have reported that both
sexes show a positive correlation between experience and practice time
on visual-spatial tasks, and subsequent performance. Experiential
skills have also shown to have an effect on performance. In one study,
37 percent of the difference between males and females in elementary school
children’s block design scores could be accounted for by the presence of
“masculine” toys in their homes (Serbin, Zelkowitz, Doyle, Gold, &
Wheaton, 1990).
In accordance with Baenninger’s (1989) study, experience
on video games and computers have a direct effect on score results, such
as in Lawton and Morrin’s (1997) study on pointing accuracy in a computer
simulated maze. That experiment contains results for a survey filled
out by participants stating that males showed greater experiential skills
on computer simulated video games. The present experiment will hope
to diminish such an imbalanced skill by transferring the task to a virtual
reality apparatus.
One major factor in spatial relation and gender difference lies
in how each gender perceives the environment around him or her. One
way that people maneuver through their environment is by the use of schematic
memory. Each person contains “packages” of generalized kinds of knowledge
known as schemas.
Even though people have schemas, males and females seem to vary with
how they apply these schemas to different applications of life, from math
and science (Lips, 1995) to memory recall (Skowronski, & Thompson,
1990) and even in gender assessment (Cann, 1993; Day, 1994). One
area where this inequality exists involves spatial characteristics of the
environment. Males have been shown to use the cardinal directions
(north, south, east, west), when giving directions while females tend to
cite landmarks in giving directions (Ward, Newcombe, & Overton, 1986).
In a navigational program, such as Lawton’s (1997) and the present study,
the removal of landmarks may account for a difference in gender scores.
According to Lawton’s study (1994), the orientation strategy (used
by males) makes use of global reference points, such as the previously
mentioned compass directions, as well as environmental factors, such as
the position of the sun in the sky. The route strategy (used by females)
involves a focus on information applied to a how a route is to be followed,
such as instructions regarding where to turn on a course.
These gender differences in wayfinding strategies have been proven
to hold true in both outdoor settings (Lawton, 1994) and indoor settings
(Lawton, 1996). In these types of real world tests, males
have shown to score higher than females by approximately 5 to 40 angular
degrees (1996).
This disparity does overlap with the spatial relational concept of
pointing accuracy, as pointing accuracy favors an orientation wayfinding
strategy, with its stress on directional positioning (Lawton, 1997). Carol
Lawton’s study will be the basis on which the present experiment will be
conducted, so a thorough explanation of her study is necessary. The
purpose of her study was to examine factors affecting gender difference
in pointing accuracy in a three-dimensional computer-simulated maze.
Her experiment was split into two sections.
In the first experiment she investigated a gender difference in pointing
accuracy after moving through the maze. Experiment 1 also examined
whether the pointing accuracy of males and females would be affected by
an increase in the amount of turns in the maze. Previous research
has shown that increasing the number of turns in a computer-simulated environment
increased the difficulty of reconstructing the route on a map (Peruch &
Lapin, 1993). In accordance with the baseline belief that males would
score better in pointing accuracy, Lawton theorized that males would also
show greater accuracy in pointing as the mazes turned more complex.
The second portion of the experiment dealt with the effect of feedback
designed to focus attention on directional information while maneuvering
through the mazes on pointing accuracy in both genders.
One reason experiments involving gender differences related to environmental
cognition and navigational ability might be due to the difficulty of conducting
research in large-scale environments. Lawton overcame this problem
by creating a three dimensional maze using a design program coordinated
with the popular computer game, Doom II? (id software, 1994). This
game allows the subject a more realistic feeling by presenting the game
in a first person format. This concept by Lawton did succeed in overcoming
the problem with relative size, but initiated another confound into the
experiment.
It is easy to hypothesize that males are more involved with video and
computer games than females. This is especially true when one takes
into account the common stereotype about males’s affinity towards the violent
nature of the video game Doom II. Lawton believed that she remedied
the situation by asking the participants to fill out a Likert-form survey
ranging on a five point scale the frequency with which they have played
the video game “Doom” or games similar to its navigational style.
The scale ranged from Not at all Frequently to Very Frequently. While
she did acknowledge the fact that video game experience needed to be respected,
she did nothing to rid the experiment of the confound. Therefore,
she was forced to state in the last sentence of her abstract that a quantitative,
not qualitative difference in pointing performance of males and females
was suggested by the study.
The results were close to median of the 5 to 40 degrees that Lawton
reported in her indoor wayfinding study (1996). The magnitude of
the difference between females and males in the computer simulation was
approximately 20?, which does fit with the preceding real world studies.
However, one point that went against the theory dealt with the differences
in maze difficulty. Gender difference in pointing accuracy was unaffected
by an increase in turns in the maze. In other words, the gap between
male and female did not increase, even though scores in general went down,
as they might have been expected to.
Lawton then tries to pass off experiential skill in the video game
as a finding, stating the more experienced males showed better scores because
of their prior interaction with the navigational skills necessary for this
task. This does strike as a misnomer due to her previous studies.
Males have been shown to outperform females in her previous navigational
tasks (1994, 1996), yet she chose to suggest male superiority was a result
of video game experience. No matter what the answer may be, the confound
still exists. Video game experience does affect the results for this
experience, and needs to addressed and remedied.
The best way to eliminate the computer experience bias, yet still keep
the task on the computer is through the use of virtual reality. Although
there have been little to no peer reviewed articles involving virtual reality
and its psychological effects, the main purpose for the existence of virtual
reality will be enough to justify its use in the study.
And the main purpose of virtual reality? To immerse the user
into as realistic an experience as possible. A more realistic experience
could then bring about better preparation and study of ideas and concepts
that for one reason or another could not happen in the real world.
This is done through the elimination of user interfaces that tie down and
“trap” the user in his or her desktop. In order to escape the confines
of the desktop, devices such as a head mounted display (HMD) have been
created. The HMD deals with not only the visual aspect of a more
realistic experience, but also functions as a median for the auditory field.
By making use of classic stereo sound, especially location specification,
like surround sound, a more integrated environment can be traversed by
the user.
As for the visual field, tactics such as binocular disparity, converging
lines, and flickering are all used to present a more three dimensional
world. Converging lines deal with the concept of linear perspective,
where parallel lines appear closer when you are farther away. This
approach is also used to show depth in two-dimensional art.
Binocular disparity is a concept that can be understood by simply looking
at oneself in the mirror. The human facial features were designed
to allow for the eyes to be slightly separate, to allow for two slightly
different views of the same image. The two eyes, separated by 5½
degrees, converge on the same point, allowing for images to be viewed in
three dimensions.
The HMD complies with this by containing two different screens, slightly
diverged, to make for a more realistic image. Finally, flickering,
or interlacing, is simply the varying of the image between each eye, one
at a time at a very rapid speed. All these factors combine to present
that three-dimensional image so crucial to bring the user to a more realistic
experience.
Another way to reduce the experiential skill present in the “Doom experienced”
males of this study is to eliminate the subject’s use of navigation.
Having each participant use verbal commands levels the bias, as both males
and females have an equal ability to say “stop” and “go”. So, by
using the HMD and verbal commands, it is my belief that the experiential
skills present in Lawton’s study (1997) will be eliminated, leaving just
the actual gender difference in pointing accuracy present in the results.
The purpose of this study is to use virtual reality equipment to eliminate
the experiential skills causing males to score so much better than females
in pointing accuracy. I hypothesize that the elimination of the experiential
skill will lower the 20-degree average. I believe that there will
still be a gender difference, real world tasks have proven so. But
the difference will lessen in this present study from Lawton’s previous
study.
MethodParticipants
The participants for this study were 12 male and 12 female small
liberal arts college students enrolled in general psychology classes. Students
received course credit for participating in this study. If the students
chose not to participate they had the option of writing a one page paper
for every one credit slip they did not have.
Materials
The maze was created using Superscape, a program for designing
virtual reality environments. The maze was presented on a 600 MHz
Pentium II processor with a VGA color display. Each subject wore
a head-mounted display (HMD), created by i-glasses. For movement, the subject
used verbal commands to tell the experimenter when to start and stop at
each intersection in the maze. The maze itself was constructed using
a large grid section in which the entire internal environment appeared
identical, with no landmarks provided. The two, four and six-turn
maze route designed by Lawton (1997) was then applied to this grid.
The walls were solid, in that participants could not pass through them,
only bounce off. The route was constructed so no more than two consecutive
turns are in the same direction. A circular cardboard “compass” similar
to that used in Lawton’s study was constructed, bearing 180 degrees in
either direction to allow participants to point exactly where they perceived
the start of the maze to be.
A specific informed consent form was created to address the specific
concerns involving virtual reality, namely the tight enclosed environment,
as well as any chance for vertigo or nausea due to the turbulent motions
involved with a head mounted display (see Appendix A). A specific
debriefing statement was also produced to discuss the parameters of this
specific study (see Appendix B).
Procedure
Each subject started at the same point in the maze, then navigated
around in the route pattern through the maze. Each subject followed
the same predestined route as it was laid out beforehand. Then each
subject used the compass to identify the start of their route in accordance
with their present position. Participants practiced using both the
HMD and the verbal commands, as well as demonstrated a clear grasp of how
to work the compass. Functional knowledge of the compass was shown
by a pointing error less than 20 degrees away from the correct answer.
Participants navigated through a real world 1-turn task until
they reached criterion (less than 20 degrees pointing error) or until they
attempted five trials. If the participants were not able to reach
criterion after five trials, the experiment was stopped due to misunderstanding
of experimental directions. This potential participant disqualification
existed at all levels of the study. If criterion was reached, the
participants moved on to attempt a practice virtual reality 2-turn task
in order to better acclimatize themselves to the environment and equipment.
Participants navigated through the maze using the HMD and verbal commands
to the experimenter. They were able to rotate their bodies to face
the new direction by using the HMD, and moved back in forth by simply informing
the experimenter. Moving backwards was not an option, as participants
were not to re-trace their steps in the maze. After criterion
was reached in the 2-turn task, participants navigated through either a
4-turn or 6-turn virtual reality route, based upon random selection
Following completion of the pointing task, participants were
asked to rate their computer experience on a paper and pencil survey (see
Appendix C). This survey accounted for experience playing “Doom”
or video games similar to it, such as “Quake” and “Duke Nukem”. The
survey also measured participants’ rate of frequency in activities thought
to improve hand-eye coordination on a scale of 1-6, with 1=never participated
in, to 6=participates in more than once a week, as well as other computer
skills and virtual reality experience. They were also asked to complete
the Immersive Tendencies Questionnaire (see Appendix D) and the Presence
Questionnaire (Witmer & Singer, 1996)(see Appendix E) to control for
a potential difference in gender and immersion, as well as presence in
the virtual environment, and any effects these variables may have had on
score.
A mixed model analysis of variance (MANOVA) as well as independent
variable t-test was used to process the data collected from the experiment.
ResultsExperiential Skill
24 students (12 male and 12 female) from an introductory psychology
class at a small New England liberal arts college participated in this
study. Age was unknown, as it was not seen as a confounding variable.
Independent variable t-tests were run to compare the means between
gender and experience on the groups’ general video games, Doom-similar
games, and virtual reality. The mean self report of general game
experience in number of hours played per week was significantly lower for
females (M=1.00, = 2.00, then for males (M=3.79, SD=3.73) (see table
1 for comparison of experiential skill surveys) t (22)=2.43, p < .05.
Experience involving Doom and similar video games approached a significant
difference with males’ number of hours played (M=33.9, SD=57.4) scoring
higher than females’ (M=0.41, SD=1.44) t (22) =2.02, p=0.056. Virtual
reality experience showed no significant difference between males’ self-rating
of their perceived personal experience (M=3.5, SD=1.17) and females’ self
rating (M=3.42, SD=1.44), t (22) =0.16, p=0.878.
Each subject filled out the Immersive Tendency Questionnaire as well
as the Presence Questionnaire at the completion of all the way-finding
tasks. T-tests were run to compare the mean ratings of all the males
and all the females in each survey. There was no significant difference
involving total presence between males and females, t (22) =1.13, p=0.272.
No significant difference was found between males and females
involving each gender’s perceived amount of control in the environment,
t (22) =0.027, p=0.978. There was a significant difference between
gender concerning how natural the virtual environment felt, with females
scoring higher (perceiving the environment as more natural)(M=13.58, SD=2.84)
than males (M=10.67, SD=3.39), t (22) =2.282, p<0.04. No significant
difference was found between males and females regarding interface quality
with the virtual reality, t (22) =0.057, p=0.955.
Regarding the Immersive Tendencies Questionnaire, no significant
difference was found between gender as to the total score on the survey,
t (22) =1.15, p=0.264. No significant difference between gender was
found for how focused a subject gets regarding various forms of stimuli,
t (22) =0.810, p=0.427. No significant difference was found regarding
how involved in a task each gender gets, t (22) =0.098, p=0.923.
Table 1
Experiential Skill Survey
Condition N M SD P
Presence-Total Score
Male
Female
12
12
81.00
85.92
11.58
9.71 0.272
Presence-Control Score
Male
Female
12
12
51.92
51.83
7.97
6.90 0.978
Presence-Natural Score
Male
Female
12
12
10.67
13.58
3.39
2.84 0.033*
Presence-Interface Quality
Male
Female
12
12
15.33
15.25
3.28
3.89 0.955
Immersion-Total Score
Male
Female
12
12
78.25
71.50
12.79
15.89 0.264
Immersion-Focus Score
Male
Female
12
12
32.83
31.08
4.24
6.17 0.427
Immersion-Involvement Score
Male
Female
12
12
27.00
26.67
8.28
8.40 0.923
General Game Experience
Male
Female
12
12
3.79
1.00
3.43
2.00 0.024*
Doom Experience
Male
Female
12
12
33.92
0.42
57.38
1.44 0.056
Virtual Reality Experience
Male
Female
12
12
3.50
3.42
1.17
1.44 0.878
Note. *p<0.04

Full Model Comparison of Turn and Gender
The first task all 24 participants participated in was a real
world, 1-turn route, scored over 5 trials. A mixed model analysis
of variance (MANOVA) with degree of pointing accuracy difference as dependent
variable was used to analyze the effects of turns and gender. Pointing
accuracy increased over trials (lower degree) in both genders, F (2, 22)=34.26,
p<0.001. No main effects were shown between gender and pointing
accuracy, F (2, 22)=0.073, p=0.790.
The second task was a 2-turn virtual reality task in which all
24 participants participated. Pointing accuracy increased over number
of trials in both genders, F (2, 22) =12.98, p<0.003. No significant
difference was found between genders in the 2-turn VR task, F (2, 22) =0.065,
p=0.801.
A virtual reality task involving 4 turns was then run with 6
males and 7 females. Pointing accuracy increased over trial in both
genders, F (2, 11) =20.45, p<0.002. No significant difference
was found between genders in the virtual reality 4-turn task, F (2, 11)
=0.236, p=0.636. The means were in the predicted direction, with
males scoring more accurately on average (M=30.00, SD=10.90) than females
(M=37.23, SD=10.1)(see adjoining table for full comparison of pointing
error means by gender).
Note. Lower scores are better.

The final virtual reality task was a 6-turn task completed by 6 males
and 5 females. Pointing accuracy was shown to increase over trial
in total participants, F (2, 9) = 16.26, p< .004. No significant
difference was found between gender in the 6-turn task, F (2, 9) =0.521,
p=0.489. Means were in the predicted direction in the 6-turn task, with
males scoring more accurately over the five trials on average (M=40.37,
SD=16.44) than females (M=57.96, SD=18.01).
Comparison of trials to criterion by gender
Criterion was reached in every trial by scoring a pointing error
less than 20 degrees away from the correct answer. An independent
t-test was run to see how males and females varied in respect to the number
of trials it took for each gender to reach criterion.
6 males and 7 females participated in a 4-turn virtual reality
task. No significant difference was found between gender, t (11)
=1.43, p= .182. Means were in the predicted direction, with males reaching
criterion earlier in the trials (M=2.00, SD=0.894) than females (M=2.86,
SD=1.22).
In the 6 turn virtual reality task, 6 males and 5 females scored
below a 20-degree difference at some point over the five trials.
No significant difference was found between gender, t (9) = 1.50, p=0.166.
Means were in the predicted direction, with males reaching the criterion
in the 6-turn route earlier in the trials (M=2.50, SD=1.52) than females
(M=3.80, SD=1.30).
Comparison of pointing error in initial trials
The initial trial (first) in the real world, virtual reality
2-turn, 4-turn, and 6-turn was analyzed using an independent variable t-test
in order to discover any difference between gender and the first trial.
No significant difference existed between males and females in the first
trial in the real world, t (22) =-0.519, p=0.609. No significant
difference was found between males in females in the virtual reality 2-turn
task, t (22) =0.161, p=0.873. No significant difference was found
between males and females in the virtual reality 4-turn task, t (11)
=-0.560, p=0.587. There was no significant difference between
males and females in the 6-turn task, t (9) =0.142, p<0.890.

Discussion The hypothesis of this study postulated that an elimination of
experiential skill, through the use of virtual reality, will lower the
20-degree average difference present in Lawton’s previous study (1997).
It was hypothesized that there would still be a difference between genders,
but the disparity between males and females would decline. The data
analysis revealed some overall significant results, as well as some data
that suggested differences, but had no significant results specifically
supporting the hypothesis.
Both sets of results, the significant findings, and the means
in the predicted direction could lead research in the field of virtual
reality and/or wayfinding. This discussion will consist primarily
of the results concerning experiential skill, gender, pointing error in
each set of trials, and the interplay between these variables.
As reviewed in the results section, there were two major statistical
analyses conducted with the data. The statistical analyses consisted
of a full model mixed analysis of variance (MANOVA), and an independent
variable t-test. Both classifications of analyses unveiled significant
findings in various areas.

Experiential Skill
In order to control for experiential skill as a confounding variable,
each subject was given a pencil and paper survey to report their computer
experience (Computer Experience Questionnaire), their immersive attentional
skill (Immersive Tendencies Questionnaire), and their interaction with
the virtual environment (Presence Questionnaire)
Results taken from the Computer Experience Questionnaire were
general game experience, Doom-similar game experience, and virtual reality
experience. The general game experience provided a significant difference
in favor of males. This is due to the larger amount of time males
spend playing video games over females. This finding was expected
and has been shown numerous times before, (i.e. Lawton, 1997).
A more specific piece of data involved in video game playing
deals with each subject’s experience involving the video game Doom, and
those similar to it. This game specifically confounds navigational
studies as the video game holds the same view point as that of both Lawton’s
study (1997) and the present study: the viewpoint of first person in a
maze based environment. This result approached a significant difference
supporting the theory that males play these types of games more than females.
One reason why Doom-experience did not reach significance would be the
large standard deviation, as males generally were very experienced in the
game, or only a “one time” player of the video game.
The final results extracted from the Computer Experience Questionnaire
deal with experience involving virtual reality. No significant difference
was shown between males and females, as suggested in the hypothesis.
Both means represented an experience level of knowledge about virtual reality,
scoring in the 3-4 range of a Likert scale, signifying personal observational
knowledge (see Appendix C, question #13). In fact, the scores might
not have even been as high if not for the participants’ experience as students
in introductory psychology courses at Saint Anselm College, where they
get a chance to view and even experience virtual reality on a personal
level. The absence of a significant difference involving virtual
reality experience is most likely due to the low prevalence of this equipment
in the normative population. This was exactly why virtual reality
was chosen to conduct the experiment. By having a technical device
that shows relative inexperience by both males and females, a better judgement
of actual wayfinding results can be analyzed without the prior confounds
involving video game experience.
The next self-report each subject filled out was an Immersive
Tendencies Questionnaire. The questions helped to deal with how involved,
focused, and immersed a person can get in an environment. No significant
differences were found on any of the scales of the questionnaire, regarding,
total immersion, focus, or involvement. The fact that females
and males scored similar on the questionnaires suggests that both females
and males become equally involved and focused in their attentional skills
regarding such stimuli as television, movies, and books.
The application to virtual reality involves the concept of imagination
and creativity. Both males and females were equally able to become
involved thanks in part to their imaginative abilities. These imaginative
qualities help each participant feel more relaxed in the virtual environment,
allowing their focus to shift to the navigational task at hand. They
are not looking at the environment from the aspect of an observer, but
from that of a participant in the environment. While this test does
not measure to what degree they are involved, the major factor lies in
the relative equality of both males and females to feel immersed, therefore
controlling another confounding variable.
The final survey each subject took was the Presence Questionnaire.
This self-report looked to measure each participant’s presence in the virtual
reality environment, that is, how much control each subject perceived to
have, how natural the environment seemed to feel, the interface quality,
which spoke to how well each subject could focus on the task and not the
actual equipment, i.e. the HMD, and the questionnaire also measured the
total presence.
There was no significant difference between the total presence
of males versus females. Both genders felt equally present in the
virtual environment, suggesting that the virtual environment was incomparable
to any of the video games that males had logged more time on, as shown
through general video game experience. It would be assumed that males
would have been more present given their prior experience with video games,
especially Doom, which patterned the virtual maze well. The lack
of a significant difference regarding total presence helps separate the
virtual environment as a biased experiential environment from that of Lawton’s
video game world (1997), and therefore helps to control experiential skill
as a confounding variable.
No significant difference was found between males and females
regarding both perceived control of the environment, as well as interface
quality. Similar to the explanation above, due to the inexperience
of both gender groups in virtual reality, their perceptions about the amount
of control and the interface quality parallel each other.
A significant difference does exist for females regarding how
natural the environment felt (p<0.04). One reason why females’
virtual experience seemed more natural might lead back to video game experience.
If females spent less time interacting with video games, then when the
female participants would put on the HMD and enter the virtual interactive
environment, that environment might feel more realistic. Conversely,
if males spent more time, as they do, interacting with video games, then
the virtual environment might not seem as natural, as they are more accustomed
to viewing such an environment, or at least a similar setup. So,
experience viewing computer generated worlds in general might have spoken
to males’ ability to not perceive the environment as that natural, or to
not perceive their movements and actions that interacted with the environment
to feel as natural as did females.

Gender and Turn in Wayfinding
A mixed model of analysis of variance was used to score the data
involving gender and pointing error in each set of trials, whether it was
in the real world, a 2-turn virtual reality route, a 4-turn virtual route,
or a 6-turn virtual route.
A significant difference was found over a five trial span for
each task, from the real world route to the virtual reality routes.
Each task showed a learning and adaptation curve for both genders leading
to a lower pointing error as trials increased. It has been demonstrated
elsewhere (Lawton, 1997; Baenninger & Newcombe, 1989) that pointing
accuracy will increase over time, and the present study is no different.
What this suggests is the validation of virtual reality as a functional
tool in cognitive visuo-spatial tasks. This adaptation by all the
participants was through each task, up to the most complicated 6–turn virtual
reality route.
No significant difference was found between gender and pointing
accuracy over the five trials in the real world 1-turn practice route.
This finding is the result of the simplicity of the task, as one turn was
not enough to cause enough disorientation to allow for wayfinding skills
to be effectively utilized. The real world task was meant as a practice
task only, to help the participant become familiar with the goal of the
experiment, as well as the equipment used. The difference in gender
might exist because there is a legitimate wayfinding skill that allows
males to perform better on more difficult tasks than females. The
difference might also exist because males use orientation strategies (the
cardinal directions; position of the sun in the sky) and females use route
strategies (use of landmarks to provide a description) (Ward, Newcombe,
& Overton, 1986).
There was also no significant difference between males and females
in the virtual reality 2-turn practice route. This was also due to
the simplicity, and was expected to yield no difference. The main
purpose of the virtual reality 2-turn task was to familiarize the participant
with the virtual environment in general, as well as with the virtual reality
equipment. After completion of the virtual reality 2-turn only,
were the participants allowed to go on to the 4-turn or 6-turn task in
order to test the hypothesis.
In the 4-turn virtual reality task, no significant difference
was found between males and females and their respected pointing accuracy.
A closer inspection of the data did reveal means in the predicted direction
in the 4-turn route. As hypothesized, males did perform better in
the task (7.2 degrees more accurate), but more importantly, at an average
below Lawton’s 20 degrees. The means do support the hypothesis stated,
but are not of a significant manner. This reason could do with the
large standard deviation in each gender. With only six males and
seven females participating in the 4-turn task the standard deviation was
quite high, even though the means were predicted. A higher population
of participants would effectively lower the standard deviation and lead
to a more significant difference, with males performing better on the task.
There was no significant difference in the 6-turn virtual reality
route, leading to a similar discussion. As in the 4-turn task, the
means were in the predicted direction, that is, males were more accurate
on average than females over the five trials. In fact, the divergence
between males and females was even greater, with males scoring, on average,
17.5 degrees better than females. But, with only six males and five
females participating in this specific task, the standard deviation was
too large to allow for a significant difference to be extracted.
With an increase in subject population, it is expected this deviation would
decrease and thus raise the difference to significant levels. For
in fact, this pointing error difference between genders of 17.5 is only
2.5 degrees off of Lawton’s own study where 20 degrees was the difference
(1997). This larger degree of difference is related to the
increase in turns. While both males and females were less accurate
with their scores in the 6-turn task, females’ scores increased at an unparalleled
rate to the males’ scores. As suggested, males scored more accurately on
the 4-turn task in virtual reality with less of a disparity between males
and females than in Lawton’s study. The accuracy did not stay parallel
when the participants were in the 6-turn task, suggesting that the 2-turn
increase between tasks caused greater confusion, especially for the females.
Another explanation could be that the random participants that took part
in the 6-turn task did not have the wayfinding skills of those participants
in the 4-turn task. One way to eliminate this possibility would be
to have each subject take both the 4-turn task and the 6-turn task, and
analyze their individual scores for each of those routes.
Trials to criterion by gender
The final analysis run on this data was an independent variable
t-test between gender and trials to criterion. Each subject had five
trials to reach criterion: in this study it was 20 degrees. Once
they scored within 20 degrees of the correct answer, the task was finished.
Though not initially hypothesized, it was thought that there might be a
gender difference in the number of trials it took for males and females
to reach that 20-degree mark. No significant differences were found
between gender. With only a 0.86 difference in means, the standard
deviation was too high to reveal significant figures. With an increase
in population size, as stated before, significant findings might be yielded.
Comparison of pointing error in initial trials
A specific view of the initial trial of each task was taken in
order to compare the differences between males and females regarding their
first speculation as to where the start of the task was. The hope
would be that each subject’s initial reaction would most clearly define
his or her true wayfinding ability, eliminating experience with the virtual
route as a confounding variable. No significant difference was found
between males and females regarding the real world 1-turn, the virtual
reality 2-turn, 4-turn, or 6-turn task. These results suggest wayfinding
could relate to experience, and only function effectively as a learned
behavior. Another explanation could lie in the fact that males and females
were still somewhat distracted by the complication of the 4-turn and 6-turn
maze. Virtual reality may cause enough discombobulating distraction as
to necessitate repeated trials to be run.
Conclusion
Both the significant and non-significant results from this study
explain much. The adaptation and learning over trials by both genders
helps validate virtual reality as a functional learning device, and strengthens
the support for its use as a psychological tool in the future.
The means in the predicted direction involving pointing error
and gender, though not significant, do open a doorway towards a better
test of gender differences involving wayfinding using technology that is
less gender biases than those devices provided by Lawton (1997).
An increase in sample size alone, with no other editing to the present
study would suggest significance and therefore eliminate some of the experiential
skill that has been biasing these such visuo-spatial cognitive tasks for
years.
This study applies to some very basic issues involving navigation
and direction, and can also have an impact on the future of virtual reality
in cognitive psychology. These variables are an important form of
human functioning in everyday life, and are worthy of immense amounts of
future study and research. This present study contributes a small
portion of the understanding of wayfinding, navigation, and virtual reality’s
influence on psychological research.

All psychological research at Saint Anselm College is conducted
according to strict ethical principles outlined by the American Psychological
Association and is in full compliance with Federal law. The Department
of Health and Human Services, for example, specifies that informed consent
must be given prior to research studies, that is, “…the knowing consent
of an individual or his legally authorized representative so situated as
to be able to exercise free power of choice without undue inducement or
any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, or other form of constraint
or coercion.”

Simply put, this means when you participate in any research study,
you will be given a clear explanation of the procedures involved.
You may ask for clarification either before or during the procedure, and
you may terminate the procedures at any time.

The experiment you have signed up for involves a task using virtual
reality equipment and computer technology, as well as the completion of
three self-surveys about your general computer experience. At this
point, it should be stated that no disguised procedures will be used in
this study, and the right to withdraw from this and all studies is at the
discretion of the participant. It is only asked that each you participate
seriously and to the best of you ability. Due to the immersive qualities
of virtual reality environment, a feeling of vertigo, even nausea could
be incurred by anyone. If you feel disorientation or any feelings
of discomfort at any time, tell me, and the experiment will be paused until
you are feeling better. If you wish to stop because of this disorientation,
you may do so at any time. Also, due to the enclosed environment that a
head mounted display presents, if you feel at any time uncomfortable, short
of breath, or in any way claustrophobic, please inform me, and the headset
will be removed, and the experiment paused until you are feeling comfortable
again, or wish to terminate the experiment. Thank you again for your
time commitment and your willingness to participate.
After having carefully read and considered the foregoing, I consent
to participate in research activities according to the terms heretofore
enumerated.

The navigational task you just completed, along with the three
surveys you filled out investigated a gender difference in visual-spatial
tasks presented in a 3-D virtual reality environment. My experiment
varied from previous work in substituting the 3-D environment in which
you were just involved, for a similar maze constructed from the same program
that created the popular computer game Doom. It was hypothesized
that by eliminating such a male biased environment as a computer game,
that a smaller, but equally significant difference could be found between
genders. The information you have provided is intended solely for
this project, and will be kept strictly confidential. It is also asked
that you withhold from discussing this study and your results with friends
or other participants, until all the participants have completed the study.
If you have any questions involving the virtual world, surveys, or results,
feel free to contact me at: Chad Kelleher, Box 1766,
100 St. Anselm Dr. Manchester NH, 03102-1310. Thank you again for
your participation.
Chad L. Kelleher

1. Do you own a personal computer? Y N
2. How many hours per day do you use a computer? Personal____
Academics_____
3. On average, how many hours a week do you spend on a computer?___
1- 0-5 hrs
2- 5-10 hrs
3- 10-20 hrs
4- 20-40 hrs
5- 40+ hrs
4. Indicate the average number of hours a week you do the following
computer activities.
a. word processing ___
b. games playing ___
c. surfing the Internet ___
d. emailing ___
e. other ___
5. How many emails do you send a day? ____
6. How many computer courses have you taken? ___
7. How would you rate your computer competency? ___
1- completely inexperienced
2- inexperienced
3- somewhat experienced/inexperienced
4- experienced
5- very experienced
8. Do you play video games? Y N
9. Are you good at computer games? Y N
10. Have you ever played the game Doom? Y N
If so, how many hours per week? ___
How many hours (approximately) have you played in the last 2 years___
11. Have you ever played the game Quake? Y N
If so, how many hours per week? ___
How many hours (approximately) have you played in the last 2 years___
12. Please list any other video or computer games that you play regularly
and how many hours per week.
GAME HOURS PER WEEK

13. How would you rate your knowledge/experience of virtual reality?
(please circle all that apply)
a. never heard of virtual reality
b. seen virtual reality on television/movies
c. read about virtual reality in various literature
d. observed virtual reality in real life, but never participated
e. played a virtual reality game before
f. participated in construction and manipulation
of virtual reality
g. master of virtual reality
14. What are the three (3) web sites you spend the most time at?
1.
2.
3.

II. Activities Rating List

Please rate the following activities on a 1 to 7 scale with 1= never
participated and 7= participate more than once a week.

Indicate your preferred answer by marking an "X" in the appropriate
box of the seven point scale. Please consider the entire scale
when making your responses, as the intermediate levels may apply.
For example, if your response is once or twice, the second box from the
left should be marked. If your response is many times but not extremely
often, then the sixth (or second box from the right) should be marked.

1. Do you easily become deeply involved in movies or tv dramas?

|________|________|________|________|________|________|________|
NEVER OCCASIONALLY OFTEN

2. Do you ever become so involved in a television program or book
that people have problems getting your attention?

|________|________|________|________|________|________|________|
NEVER OCCASIONALLY OFTEN

32. Have you ever felt completely focused on something, so wrapped
up in that one activity that nothing could distract you?

|________|________|________|________|________|________|________|
NOT AT ALL OCCASIONALLY FREQUENTLY

33. How frequently do you get emotionally involved (angry, sad,
or happy) in news stories that you see, read, or hear?

|________|________|________|________|________|________|________|
NEVER OCCASIONALLY OFTEN

34. Are you easily distracted when involved in an activity or
working on a task?

|________|________|________|________|________|________|________|
NEVER OCCASIONALLY OFTEN

Scoring Instructions

Simply score the boxes for each question from left to right beginning
with one and increasing in value to the box the subject has marked, and
the number of that box becomes the score. The subscale scores are
the sum of the scores for each subscale item. There is no weighting
of items or subscales. The questionnaire total and subscales are
comprised as follows:

New questions have been added to the questionnaire, but should
not be added to the total or subscales as they are just beginning to be
investigated. The new (unanalyzed) questions are scored the same
as the other questions. None of the new questions seem to require
reverse scoring.

Characterize your experience in the environment, by marking an "X" in
the appropriate box of the 7-point scale, in accordance with the question
content and descriptive labels. Please consider the entire scale
when making your responses, as the intermediate levels may apply.
Answer the questions independently in the order that they appear.
Do not skip questions or return to a previous question to change your answer.

WITH REGARD TO THE EXPERIENCED ENVIRONMENT

1. How much were you able to control events?

|________|________|________|________|________|________|________|
NOT AT ALL SOMEWHAT COMPLETELY

2. How responsive was the environment to actions that you initiated
(or performed)?

|________|________|________|________|________|________|________|
NOT AT ALL SLOWLY LESS THAN
ONE MINUTE
21. How proficient in moving and interacting with the virtual
environment did you feel at the end of the experience?

Simply score the boxes for each question from left to right beginning
with one and increasing in value to the box the subject has marked, and
the number of that box becomes the score. Some of the questions have
reversed response anchors, and are scored so the left-most box receives
a seven and the rest decrease in value. The subscale scores are the
sum of the scores for each subscale item. There is no weighting of
items or subscales. The questionnaire total and subscales are comprised
as follows:

The last three subscales listed for the PQ are marked with an asterisk
(*) because they have yet to be used in analyses, but are being retained
on a theoretical basis. Since there have been no haptic or auditory
interfaces, nor any differences in resolution to judge, those items have
been scored as zero. Items marked with a plus (+) have to be reverse
scored (see above) in order to contribute to the subscale and overall totals.

New questions have been added to the questionnaire, but should
not be added to the total or subscales as they are just beginning to be
investigated. The new (unanalyzed) questions are scored the same
as the other questions. None of the new questions seem to require
reverse scoring.